Search by faculty:

Sean Harris (1)Agnieszka Kwapisz (1)

 

Andreas Thorsen (1)Eric Van Steenburg (1)

(Alphabetical by Faculty Last Name)

"Seasonality, Weather, and Obstetric Level of Care: An Analysis of Rural Delivery Locations"

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Andreas Thorsen · Associate Professor of Management
Co-author: Maggie Thorsen, Montana State University
Co-author: Ronald G. McGarvey, University of Missouri
Sean Harris · Assistant Professor of Accounting

Abstract:

Birth seasonality in the United States typically peaks in late summer, yet research has rarely examined these patterns in northern mountainous regions or across different hospital obstetric levels. This study investigates the temporal dynamics of maternal healthcare-seeking behavior in Montana, specifically focusing on seasonality in birth volume and obstetric bypassing (delivering at a non-local hospital). We conducted a retrospective analysis of 98,524 birth records (2014–2022) at hospitals with Level 1, 2, and 3 obstetric units, integrating driving distances and monthly county-level climate data. Statistical analyses included calculating observed-to-expected (O-E) ratios to identify seasonality and regression models to test interactions between season, hospital level, and weather. Montana birth volume is distinguished by a peak in June and a trough in January, with seasonality most pronounced at Level 3 hospitals. Obstetric bypassing significantly decreases during winter (O-E ratio 0.95), particularly for Level 1 hospitals, while increasing during warm, high-precipitation months. Over time, bypassing toward Level 3 hospitals has risen from 13.6% to 20%. We conclude that seasonality and weather correlates are associated with significant variation in care-seeking patterns, reflecting the unique challenges facing rural hospitals.

 

"Framing novelty in crowdfunding: Which words win support, where, and at what stakes"

Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal

Agnieszka Kwapisz · Professor of Management

Research Summary: We examine how promotional language (“hype”) in reward-based crowdfunding is associated with campaign success, and whether those associations vary across sector contexts and with campaign execution burden. Using dictionary-based text measures from 635 U.S. Kickstarter campaigns across five sectors, we distinguish three novelty-framing moves: capability/rigor language, excellence/status language, and attitude/affect language. We find no uniform association between aggregate hype and success. Instead, the observed associations vary systematically across rhetorical moves, sectors, and goal levels. Capability/rigor language is positively associated with success in Technology, attitude/affect language is positively associated with success in Entertainment, and excellence/status language is negatively associated with success in Design. Beyond these sector differences, the paper's clearest cross-cutting pattern is that capability/rigor language becomes more positively associated with success as funding goals increase.

Managerial Summary: The value of “hype” on Kickstarter depends on what is said, what is being offered, and how ambitious the ask is. In our data, Technology campaigns are more positively associated with success when descriptions emphasize testing, technical specificity, and execution readiness, whereas Entertainment campaigns are more positively associated with attitude/affect language. In contrast, excellence/status claims are associated with lower success in Design. Across contexts, the clearest pattern is that feasibility-oriented language becomes more positively associated with success as funding goals increase, suggesting that larger asks benefit more from cues of deliverability than from undifferentiated promotional intensity.


"Public Policy Perception Processing: A Conceptual Framework and Theory-Based Research Agenda"

Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing

Eric Van Steenburg · Associate Professor of Marketing
Co-author: Riley Van Steenburg, American University

Abstract: If the electorate is as polarized as evidence suggests, the opportunity to galvanize stakeholders around public policy may be a pipe dream. Yet, that is the charge of marketers involved in policymaking. Therefore, it is crucial to understand what is not yet known—the cognitive process individuals follow when considering a policy. Drawing on theory from marketing, psychology, and political science, this research builds a conceptual framework that identifies the cognitive process individuals follow that results in attitudes and behavior. Implementation examples offer opportunities for practitioners to apply the concepts, and a research agenda provides direction for academics.

 

Back to Top